Why it is in Europe’s interests to act as if Trump were at the gates

To the Editor – I read in Il Foglio that my ‘thorn in the side’ is that I’m carrying on working, whilst the election campaign is still at a standstill. I plead guilty and thank Fabio Massa for the gentle nudge. But there is a more obvious thorn in the side: there has been talk of the primaries for months, without any timetable, rules or roadmap. The debate over candidates must go hand in hand with that over ideas. Those who have governed Milan since 2011 must take credit for their achievements, acknowledge their mistakes and set out how to rectify them. And in the meantime, they must govern: the cost of living crisis and the housing emergency will not wait. There are two priorities: the Extraordinary Housing Plan, with the Housing Corporation that we will bring before the Council, and the final budget of this term of office, to safeguard services, investments and sound finances. The national budget does not help: without new rules on the tourist tax, Milan risks losing 50 million a year. We need autonomy, resources and responsibility. There is no such thing as the perfect candidate: what matters is a team where ‘we’ comes before ‘I’. There is still tomorrow. Today, we get on with the work.

To the Editor – Donald Trump’s defeat in the mid-term elections – at long last – raises an issue that goes beyond American politics. A weakened president might seek redemption in foreign policy, heightening unpredictability and unilateralism. Faced with this risk, Europe cannot take refuge in merely invoking international law. Rules are essential, but they do not defend themselves. Every legal order requires a political order and a power to underpin it. For seventy years, the liberal system has held together thanks to treaties and institutions, but also to American power, which guaranteed its credibility. If that power becomes uncertain or erratic, the European problem is not primarily a legal one: it is a geopolitical one. The question is not which rules to defend, but who is capable of doing so. For too long, Europe has believed that law, the market and cooperation could replace power. Today it is discovering that law without power risks becoming a moral wishful thinking, whilst power without law degenerates into arbitrariness. The response to the US election must therefore translate into greater political, strategic and military capacity, both nationally and collectively. Not to oppose the United States, but to assume greater responsibility in defending the international order. The real crisis facing the West will not begin when someone challenges the rules, but when no one is any longer willing – or able – to uphold them with the necessary political, diplomatic and military strength.

Interesting points. However, if one were to identify a risk for Europe in the aftermath of the mid-term elections, another factor emerges—perhaps the most significant. The two years of Trump’s second term have forced Europe to come to terms with a new scenario in which its aim to be more autonomous, more independent and less vulnerable could no longer be addressed merely at conferences: it had to be put into practice. Trump, unwittingly, has been a driving force behind innovation in Europe. With a weaker ‘Trumpism’, Europe has two paths before it: to believe that the worst is over, or to believe that the best is yet to come. For Europe, living as if Trump were still at the door is the only way to keep growing and to keep pedalling without coming to a standstill, as if on an exercise bike.